The Era of "Gags" and Congressional Petitions--John Quincy Adams; his
Petition for Disunion--Legislation from 1835 to 1845--Annexation of
Texas--The Liberty Party of 1840, Free Soil Party of 1848, and Republican
Party of 1856--Mexican War and Wilmot Proviso.
The decade embraced between the years 1835 and 1845 may be termed the
third epoch in the history of this movement. In that period, the grand
experiment of the abolitionists was most effectually tried. They had felt
the public pulse, developed their power and resources, had the benefit of
experience, and ascertained to what extent the public mind could be
prejudiced by the course of agitation which they had pursued. It was in
fact an era of lessons, as well to the country as to themselves. From a
mere handful, the original organization had grown to be a power within
itself--a power at the ballot-box--a power for right or wrong, for good or
mischief, too self-reliant and too strong to be disregarded. Neither
legislative enactments, nor riots, nor personal chastisement, nor public
opinion, had been able to restrain its rapid advances towards the
consummation of its hopes. It lost ground nowhere, and in every
non-slaveholding State its friends and funds were greatly multiplied. As
an indication of its extraordinary growth, the number of anti-slavery
societies in the United States, in the year 1838, may be safely estimated
at two thousand, with at least two hundred thousand persons enrolled as
members.
These, however, were not all entitled to the suffrages of the party. They
were the children and wives of fanatics who learned their lessons of
abolition in the Bible classes, Sunday and secular schools, and from their
parents and husbands. The sentiment was intruded, indeed, in all the
relations of life--social, financial and domestic, and even in the affairs
of love, Cupid himself was made subservient to its ascendancy. The belles
of the day would hardly look upon a suitor who was not as well a
worshipper at the shrine of their political passion, as of their beauty,
and no youngster's domestic destiny was at all certain of fruition who was
not sound upon what was then regarded as the soul-saving question of
abolitionism. The youths of 1840 have become the men of 1860, and in the
enormous increase of the republican party, we see the result of the early
influences thus set at work.
For the first time in its history, the organization began to be regarded
as a political element in the land, and worthy of a courtship by those who
desired its influence and support. Candidates for office began to be
catechised, and such men as William H. Seward, Levi Lincoln, William L.
Marcy and others, found time to give lengthy replies to the authors of
this new inquisition, setting forth their views. In local politics, it was
the moral and political test by which men were measured, and it lay at the
foundation of all the subsequent State action of the Northern Legislatures
upon the subject of anti-slavery.
In both branches of Congress, also, the question of abolition for the
first time occupied a large share of the deliberations, and was discussed
under every possible aspect. From 1831, when John Quincy Adams presented
fifteen petitions in a single bunch, for the abolition of slavery in the
District of Columbia, similar documents, got up and circulated by
anti-slavery societies, poured into both branches of the National
Legislature in a steady stream. They also called for a prohibition of what
was termed an "internal slave trade" between the States, avowing at the
same time that their ultimate object was to abolish slavery, not only in
the District, but throughout the Union. It was, indeed, the only mode in
which the fanatics could agitate the question in Congress, and was a part
of the scheme by which they expected to accomplish their purposes. Under
the influence of the feelings excited by these causes, the Southern
Senators and members declared, almost to a man, that if the Southern
States could not remain in the Union without having their domestic peace
continually disturbed by the systematic attempts of the abolitionists to
produce dissatisfaction and revolt among the slaves and incite their wild
passions to vengeance, the great law of self-preservation would compel
them to separate from the North. This persistent demand of the
abolitionists, through petitions, continued from session to session,
until, becoming a nuisance, an effort was made to prevent their farther
reception. The effort was, for a time, successful, and resulted in what
was called the "era of gags"--these gags being simply a rule of the House,
"That all petitions, memorials, resolutions and propositions relating in
any way or to any extent to the question of slavery shall, without either
being printed or referred, be laid on the table, and no further action
whatever shall be had thereon."
This was respectively passed in 1836, 1837 and 1838, and in 1840 it was
incorporated into the standing rules of the House--being thenceforward
known as the "Twenty-first Rule." The vote upon this was--yeas, 128; nays,
78.
The excitement produced in the House on the occasion of these several
votes was intense, and speeches were made upon the question by the most
distinguished men of the country.
In 1837, the immediate occasion of the contest was the pertinacious effort
of Mr. Slade, of Vermont, to make the presentation of abolition petitions
the ground of agitation and action against the institution of slavery in
the Southern States. Mr. Rhett, of South Carolina, warned him of the
consequences of such inflammatory harangues, and his refusal to desist
from them was the signal for a general disorder and uproar. The next
morning a resolution similar to that above quoted was adopted by a vote of
135 yeas to 60 nays--the full two-thirds and fifteen. "This," says Thomas
H. Benton, "was one of the most important votes ever delivered in the
House." Upon its issue depended the quiet of the House on one hand, and on
the other the renewal and perpetuation of the scenes of the day
before--ending in breaking up all deliberation and all national
legislation.
Thus were stifled, and in future, for a few years at least, prevented in
the House the inflammatory debates on these disturbing petitions. It was
the great session of their presentation, being offered by hundreds and
signed by hundreds of thousands of persons--many of them women, who forgot
their sex and their duties to mingle in the inflammatory work; and some of
them clergymen, who forgot their mission of peace to stir up strife among
those who should be brethren. After long and protracted efforts by John
Quincy Adams, who was then champion of the abolitionists on the floor of
the House, this restriction upon the right of petition was removed in
December, 1845, by a vote of 108 to 80. Among the acts of this statesman
in 1839, was the presentation of a resolution that the following
amendments to the Constitution of the United States should be proposed to
the several States of the Union:--
"1. From and after the 4th July, 1842, there shall be throughout the
United States no hereditary slavery; but on and after that day, every
child born in the United States, their territory or jurisdiction,
shall be born free.
"2. With the exception of the Territory of Florida, there shall
henceforth never be admitted into this Union any State, the
Constitution of which shall tolerate within the same the existence of
slavery.
"3. From and after the 4th July, 1845, there shall be neither slavery
nor slave trade at the seat of government of the United States."
This proposition of course received no favor either North or South, and
was speedily laid aside. Subsequently he presented a petition praying for
a dissolution of the Union--the first of the kind ever offered to the
government--whereupon a resolution was submitted to Congress to the effect
that Mr. Adams in so doing had offered the deepest indignity to the House
and insult to the people of the United States, and that, for thus
permitting, through his instrumentality, a wound to be aimed at the
Constitution and existence of his country he merited expulsion from the
national council and the severest censure. It concluded--"This they hereby
do for the maintenance of their own purity and dignity; for the rest, they
turn him over to his own conscience and the indignation of all true
American citizens."
The resolution was discussed for several days, in which Mr. Adams and his
anti-slavery propagandism were handled without gloves; but finally the
whole subject was laid upon the table.
THE ANNEXATION OF TEXAS.
Another source of discussion, both in and out of Congress, about this
time, was the Texas question. As far back as 1829, the annexation of Texas
was agitated in the Southern and Western States, being urged on the ground
of the strength and extension it would give to the slaveholding interest.
This fact at once enlisted opposition from the entire anti-slavery
sentiment of the North, in which British abolitionism took part, and every
effort was made on the other side of the water to increase the sectional
jealousy already known to be existing. The English press, Parliament and
statesmen, all treated the proposed acquisition as one in which they felt
called upon to interfere. The famous "Texan plot," which was matured at
the "World's Anti-Slavery Convention," held in London in 1840, was one of
the results.
The part to be performed by the British government embraced a double
object. The large territory claimed by Texas was known to contain most of
the remaining cotton lands of North America. A virtual control of these
lands would, therefore, be invaluable to British commerce. The country was
but thinly settled, and the number of slaves was small enough to render
emancipation of easy attainment. Thus, if by a timely interposition of her
influence and diplomacy, Great Britain could establish a rival cotton
producing country at our very door, and prevent the growth of slavery
there, she would partially prevent a growing dependence on the slave
products of the United States, and at the same time set up a barrier to
the further extension of Southern civilization in that direction. There
was but one obstacle in the way. Texas preferred annexation to the United
States, and, notwithstanding British assistance, believed to have been
proffered to Santa Anna in 1842, when he resolved to send an invading army
into the territory for the purpose of declaring emancipation, and other
objects; notwithstanding the resolutions of Northern Legislatures and
acrimonious debates in Congress; notwithstanding every effort, home and
foreign, to prevent annexation; through the patriotic efforts of General
Jackson, President Tyler, Mr. Calhoun and other statesmen, on the 16th of
December, 1845, Texas was admitted into the Union.
Though thus defeated in their immediate designs, one point was gained by
the friends of anti-slavery. They succeeded in obtaining a position in
Congress which enabled them to agitate the whole Union. From that time
their power began to increase, until the infection has diseased the great
mass of the people of the North, who, whatever may be their opinion of the
original abolition party, which still keeps up its distinctive
organization, never fail, when it comes to acting, to co-operate in
carrying out their measures.
THE BEGINNING OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY--THE LIBERTY PARTY.
The year 1840 was marked by two important events, namely, the formation of
a distinct political party of abolitionists, and a division in the two
leading anti-slavery societies of the country. The Liberty Party arose
from the fact that, after a protracted experiment, the candidates of the
old parties could not, to any extent, however questioned or pledged, be
depended upon to do the work which the abolitionists demanded of them.
Such an organization was advocated by Mr. Garrison as early as 1834; but
it was not until the annual meeting of the New York Anti-Slavery Society
at Utica, in September, 1838, that a series of resolutions or a platform
was adopted, setting forth the principles of political action, and
solemnly pledging those who adopted them to vote for no candidates who
were not fully pledged to anti-slavery measures. In July, 1839, a National
Anti-Slavery Convention was held at Albany, and the mode of political
action against slavery, including the question of a distinct party, was
fully discussed, but without coming to any definite decision by vote
farther than to refer the question of independent nominations to the
judgment of abolitionists in their different localities. The Monroe county
convention for nominations at Rochester, N. Y., September, 1839, adopted a
series of resolutions and an address prepared by Myron Holly, which have
been regarded as laying the real corner-stone of the Liberty party. He
may, therefore, be regarded, more than any other man, as its founder.
In January, 1840, a New York State Anti-Slavery Convention was held in
Genesee county. The traveling at that season of the year was bad, and
delegates were in attendance from only six States. Among these were Myron
Holly and Gerrit Smith. By this convention, a call was issued for a
National Convention, and accordingly, April 1, 1840, it assembled at
Albany--Alvan Stuart presiding. After a full discussion, the Liberty party
was organized, and James G. Birney and Thomas Earle were nominated for
President and Vice-President of the United States. At the Presidential
election in the autumn of that year, the entire vote of the Liberty party
amounted to 7,059. In 1844, the Liberty candidates, James G. Birney and
Thomas Morris, received 62,300 votes. These, however, were but a small
part of the professed abolitionists of the United States, the great
majority voting for the nominees of the old parties--Harrison, Van Buren,
Polk and Clay.
The other event of the year 1840, to which we have alluded, was the
division in the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society in Boston, and a
division in the American Anti-Slavery Society of New York, the causes in
each case being more or less identified with each other. Without going
into the subject, it may be briefly stated that the principal cause in
both instances was a difference of opinion on theological questions as
applied to politics and reformatory measures, and especially theological
jealousies. The most rabid among the abolitionists have been infidels, or
little less, from the start, and have absorbed every species of
fanaticism, in whatever shape it has appeared since. Another question
resulting in the division appears to have been "Woman's Rights," or, in
other words, what position females ought to occupy in the society. As
early as 1835, these moral hermaphrodites were in the habit of delivering
public lectures and scattering publications through the land; but their
wagging tongues finally became such a nuisance that several clergymen
published a pastoral letter in 1837, strongly censuring all such unwomanly
interference. The result was, as has been stated, great excitement and a
subsequent separation of the respective opponents.
Shortly after this division, we find the American Anti-Slavery Society, at
one of its annual meetings, raising the flag of "No Union with
Slaveholders," demanding a dissolution of the Union, and denouncing the
federal constitution as pro-slavery--"a covenant with death and an
agreement with hell."
To resume the history of the progress of the party. In 1835 a State
Convention of abolitionists was held at Port Byron, New York, at which an
address was presented embodying the views of a number of individuals, who,
while they were abolitionists at heart, were not rabid or ultra enough to
be prepared to act with the Liberty party. This was printed, circulated,
and gained adherents, and upon its basis, in 1847, a convention assembled
at Macedon, New York, when Gerrit Smith and Elihu Burrit were nominated
for President and Vice-President of the United States; but the latter
declining, the name of Charles C. Foote was afterwards substituted. This
party was known by the name of the Liberty League. Subsequently its
principles became merged into the Buffalo platform of 1847. Gerrit Smith
was then again proposed as a candidate for the Presidency; but the course
of leading men in the convention required the nomination of a different
man. Accordingly, Hon. John P. Hale, of New Hampshire--an "independent
democrat," as he termed himself--and Hon. Leicester King, of Ohio, were
nominated. This, however, was only temporary; and another convention was
called, and held at Buffalo, August 9, 1848, composed of "the opponents to
slavery extension, irrespective of parties," and including, of course, all
those committed to the one idea of abolition. It was one of the most
remarkable political meetings on record, for it was the beginning of the
political drama which has since resulted in a dissolution of the Union.
Vast multitudes, from all parts of the non-slaveholding States, of all
political parties, came together, and seemed to be melted into one by
their common zeal against the aggressions of slavery. Though they looked
only to the restraint of slavery within the bounds which they claimed our
fathers had erected for its protection, still the opposition sprang from
the strong anti-slavery sentiment already pervading the country. It was
the springing up of the green blade, and the forming of the ear from the
many years sowing of the abolitionists. The nomination of Martin Van Buren
and Charles Francis Adams, of Massachusetts, was made with great unanimity
and enthusiasm, though by a body composed of original elements of the most
extreme contrariety. Messrs. Hale and King, as was expected, withdrew
their names. The old Liberty party was absorbed in the new organization,
whose platform was broad enough to satisfy any reasonable abolitionist.
Mass meetings were held in every village to hear the new word, and within
a few months an impulse was communicated to the great mass of the Northern
mind which has constituted the basis of its action ever since. The number
of votes cast for these candidates in 1848 was 291,263.
The platform was substantially as follows:--That the people propose no
interference by Congress with slavery within the limits of any State; that
the federal government has no constitutional power over life, liberty or
property without due legal progress; that Congress has no more power to
make a slave than to make a king--no more power to establish slavery than
to establish a monarchy; that Congress ought to prohibit slavery in all
the territories; that the issue of the slave power is accepted--no more
slave States and no slave territory; no more compromises; and finally, the
establishment of a free government in California and New Mexico.
In 1852, this same party nominated John P. Hale and George W. Julian. The
number of votes then cast was 155,825. The platform was much the same as
that which preceded it four years before, though more progressive and
revolutionary in several of its ideas, one of its clauses being "that
slavery is a sin against God and a crime against man, which no human
enactment nor usage can make right, and that Christianity, humanity and
patriotism, alike demand its abolition." Another clause was to the effect
that the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, being repugnant to the principles of
Christianity and the principles of the common law, had no binding force
upon the American people.
The republican party of 1856 was merely an enlargement or extension of the
old free-soil organization of the preceding eight years. It was modified,
it is true, by many of the events of the time, but its foundation was laid
upon precisely the same principles that had been enunciated during the
previous twelve years. It was emphatically a Northern party, extending
only here and there by some straggling outposts over the slave boundary.
It was so far anti-slavery as to resent the repeal of the Missouri
Compromise, and oppose the introduction of slavery into new territory. As
events progressed, the forces combatting on either side of the great
question of the day became more concentrated and determined, and more
inspirited by a single purpose, until the one idea of anti-slavery became
distinctly developed and firmly fixed in the Northern mind.
The Republican Convention assembled at Philadelphia, June 18, 1856, when
John C. Fremont and Wm. L. Dayton were nominated for President and Vice
President of the United States, and in the following November received
1,341,264 votes.
The election for 1860 has only recently terminated in the elevation to the
head of the Federal Government of Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin, by
a purely anti-slavery vote of 1,865,840. The events which preceded it are
too fresh to require repetition; but, for the first time in the history of
our confederacy, we look upon the spectacle of a sectional party,
defiant, unyielding and uncompromising, whose principles aim a blow direct
at the annihilation of one of the institutions of the South, in the full
flush of victory, singing poeans of glory over its success, with a Union
dissolving around it, while another portion of the country is agitated to
its very centre in preparations for self-protection against the
usurpations which, from press and pulpit, and floor of Congress, have been
so boldly threatened. Whether as abolition, liberty, free-soil or
republican, the party has always shown the cloven hoof, and the best
efforts of its more considerate friends have never been able to cover the
deformity. Into the masses it has instilled the most unrelenting hatred to
slavery, until all other ideas, feelings and passions have, for the time,
been swallowed up in this one overwhelming sentiment.
It has dissolved the Union, though formed and cemented in the blood of our
fathers, rather than it should tolerate an institution which is older than
the Union. It has shed the blood of innocent white men while engaged in
the discharge of their sworn duty, and made widows and orphans rather than
return an escaped servant to his master and obey the Constitution of the
country. Such is the spirit which controls this party, by whatever name it
may be known.
Its leaders, claiming to stand by principle, hug to their bosom the most
damning political heresies. Pretending to obey God and reverence the
Bible, some of them are the most unblushing infidels, who boldly proclaim
that the Sacred Word is not worth the paper upon which it is printed,
unless it denounce slavery and applaud abolitionism, and would teach that
the Constitution of our country is the consummation of every iniquity.
Some of them aspire to be the followers of Jesus, but convert their sacred
desks into political rostrums, from which are fulminated the falsest
denunciations that a diseased mind can conjure into existence. Claiming to
be teachers of religion and peace, they prove the authenticity of their
holy commission by exhorting to civil war, making collections for Sharpe's
rifles, and playing the _role_ of spiritual demagogues among the falling
ruins of the republic.
* * * * *
The year 1841 was marked by another attempt at insurrection. On the 22d of
July, during a hot night, several negroes were overheard conversing in
their quarters, on a plantation, near New Orleans, respecting an
insurrection in which they intended to join. An investigation was made the
next day, and resulted in tracing out a widely-extended organization among
the slaves of the neighborhood, having a general rising in view. This
early discovery of the plot of course prevented its consummation, and the
execution and punishment of the instigators soon quelled every design of
an outbreak.
In 1845 we find Cassius M. Clay mobbed in Lexington, Ky., and his paper,
the True American, stopped, the presses, type, &c., being packed up and
forwarded to Cincinnati, for advocating the incendiary doctrines of the
abolitionists, and thereby producing an excitement among the slaves, and
arousing apprehensions in the community lest they should rise in rebellion
against the whites.
THE MEXICAN WAR.
We have already brought our chronological history down to the year 1845,
when Texas was admitted as a State. It was during the progress of
annexation that the government of Mexico served a formal notice on the
United States that annexation would be viewed in the light of a
declaration of war. This notice, however, was of little avail, and before
the close of the year 1845, Congress had consummated the act. The war
broke out in April, 1846, the second year of Mr. Polk's administration,
and on the 11th of May the President issued his proclamation to that
effect. A large portion of the western domain of Texas, as now described,
was disputed territory, occupied by Mexicans and under Mexican rule at the
time of and after annexation. General Taylor was ordered to march from
Corpus Christi, and take up his position on the Rio Grande, opposite
Matamoras, thus traversing the disputed territory from its eastern to its
western border. The Mexican army, on the opposite side of the river,
immediately commenced hostilities, and soon after followed the battles of
Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma. How the war was continued and terminated
are matters of general history. Peace was at last dictated to Mexico on
the 30th of May, 1848, and resulted in a surrender by her of a large belt
of her northern territories, extending from the Rio Grande to the Pacific,
including California, though at that time its immense wealth and great
importance were not fully appreciated. In Congress and among the people of
the North the war was not popular. It was said to be a scheme for the
acquirement of more slave territory, and this fact of itself excited
contention throughout the land.
THE WILMOT PROVISO.
On the 12th of August, 1846, a bill being under consideration in the
Committee of the Whole, making further provision for the expenses
attending the intercourse between the United States and Mexico, Mr. David
Wilmot, of Pennsylvania, moved the following amendment:--
"Provided, that as an express and fundamental condition to the
acquisition of territory from the republic of Mexico, by the United
States, by virtue of any treaty which may be negotiated between them,
and to the use by the Executive of the moneys herein appropriated,
neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any
part of said territory, except for crime, whereof the party shall
first be duly convicted."
This amendment was adopted by a vote of yeas 77, nays 58. The bill was not
voted on in the Senate, that body adjourning _sine die_ before it reached
that stage.
On the 8th of February, the Three Million Bill being under consideration,
a similar amendment was offered in the House, and on the 15th was adopted
by a vote of 115 yeas and 106 nays. The Senate having passed a similar
bill, which came before the House on the 3d of March, 1847, Mr. Wilmot
moved to amend the same by adding his proviso thereto; but it was rejected
by a vote of yeas 97, nays 102. The Senate bill, without the amendment of
Mr. Wilmot, then became a law. This celebrated proviso has been offered,
by different senators and representatives, to various bills since. Its
popular use, in fact, since that time, constitutes a great chapter in the
political history of the country. For a long time it has rung in the ears
of the public, and it will never cease until the question of slavery
ceases to be a political question in the organization of new Territories
and new States.
* * * * *
In 1848, Connecticut, which had never passed a law completely abolishing
slavery, and which then contained some eight or ten slaves, through her
Legislature enacted its total abolition forever, compelling the masters of
the few slaves existing to support them for life.
The escape of slaves from the South has been one of the principal
practical effects of abolition ever since the idea assumed shape, in 1830.
Men and women have been found, North and South, who, either from
philanthropic motives or under the pecuniary inducements of abolition
societies, have aided in their escape. Among these, New England
"schoolmarms" and schoolmasters have played an active part, and several
were from time to time arrested.
One Delia Webster suffered for such an interference with other people's
affairs by an incarceration in the penitentiary at Lexington, Ky., in
1845, for two years. Another, Rev. Charles Torrey, for similar offences,
was sentenced to six years in the Maryland penitentiary, but died before
the expiration of the sentence.
Many other instances of a similar nature might be cited; but these are
enough to indicate the extent to which fanaticism carried its followers.
The year 1848 was characterized by the usual venom which the anti-slavery
societies industriously endeavored to distil into the community. Fred.
Douglas, Edmund Quincy, Francis Jackson, Abby Kelly, Garrison, Phillips,
Pillsbury, Lucy Stone, Theodore Parker, and a retinue of negro orators,
escaped slaves and others, regularly held their meetings and indulged in
their customary rhodomontades. At the New England Convention, which
assembled during this year, a series of one hundred conventions for the
purpose of agitating the question of dissolution of the Union was
commenced in Massachusetts, and funds were raised for the purpose. Some of
these meetings were broken up by indignant mobs, but they were mainly
allowed to go on, and accumulated disciples.
THE FOURTH EPOCH.